Ezekiel, Jonah, and Pastoral Epistles by Patrick Fairbairn - Jonah 1:3 - 1:8

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | Download

Ezekiel, Jonah, and Pastoral Epistles by Patrick Fairbairn - Jonah 1:3 - 1:8


(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

CHAPTER III. JONAH’S BEHAVIOUR ON RECEIVING THE DIVINE COMMISSION, AND THE EXTRAORDINARY MEANS TAKEN TO RECLAIM HIM FROM HIS BACKSLIDING

IF it seemed strange, at first sight, that Jonah should have received a commission from the Lord to go to Nineveh, his conduct on receiving the commission appears yet more strange: “But Jonah,” it is said with perfect simplicity, and without any attempt either to explain or to justify his behaviour, “Jonah rose up to flee unto Tarshish from the presence of the Lord, and went down to Joppa; and he found a ship going to Tarshish: so he paid the fare thereof, and went down into it, to go with them unto Tarshish from the presence of the Lord.” This, we believe, is the only case on record of a true prophet being charged with the deliverance of a distinct and solemn message from the Lord, and yet proving so unfaithful to the charge as to take upon himself the fearful risk of keeping the message concealed in his own bosom. We have no reason to doubt, however, that there were instances of unfaithfulness in the prophetical, as well as the priestly order in Israel, to the extent, at least, of not maintaining the protest against error, and denouncing the judgments of heaven against sin, with the frequency and boldness which became the office. In this respect the prophets, more especially after the institution of the schools of the prophets, to which they usually belonged, and by which they were formed into a distinct order, had much the same part to fulfil that now devolves on ministers of the gospel. They were special, authorized teachers of the church, charged with the duty of expounding the law of God, and applying it to the ever-varying condition and circumstances of the people. This was the case to a considerable extent, at least in later times, even in the kingdom of Judah; but in the kingdom of Israel, where the priesthood was corrupt to the core, and their ministrations were utterly rejected by God, the prophetical order assumed a still more regular and organized character, and the prophets had to do much that properly belonged to the priesthood. Thus we find Elijah on Mount Carmel even officiating as a priest at the altar; and from an incidental notice in the history of the Shunamite woman respecting Elisha, it would appear that the prophets were in the habit of presiding at religious meetings on Sabbath-days and new moons.— (2Ki_4:23) It would also appear from a fact stated at the close of the same chapter—the fact of a man from Baal-shalisha bringing to Elisha bread of the first-fruits—that the dues of the priesthood (of which these first-fruits formed a part, Deu_18:4-5) were paid to the prophets by the pious remnant among whom they then ministered in Israel.

This being the case, however, in the kingdom of Israel—the prophets there having in the first instance to act the part of public guardians, expounders, and teachers of the law of God—we can easily understand how, in this department at least of their official duties, they may occasionally have given way to a spirit of slumber, and have become chargeable with unfaithfulness. Their calling, in this view of it, very nearly coincided with that of a minister of the gospel, whose office, even when accompanied with suitable spiritual gifts, affords no security against partial shortcomings and failures in duty. We even find an occasion recorded in New Testament scripture, on which an apostle, though occupying in respect of office a much higher position than either a Christian minister or an ancient prophet, was sharply reproved for unfaithfulness in duty by another apostle.— (Galatians 2) And those who in the church at Corinth were supernaturally endowed with prophetical gifts, are plainly charged by St Paul with a certain measure of misdirection and abuse in the application that was made of them.— (1 Corinthians 14)

It would therefore be against all analogy to suppose, that the prophets in Old Testament times uniformly exercised the divine gift committed to them with unfailing promptitude and fidelity. It was doubtless possible for them, not less than for private believers, to resist the promptings, or even altogether to quench the agency, of the Spirit that wrought in them. One case, in particular, is recorded of most flagrant misconduct in a prophet, the old man at Bethel, who, under the false pretence of having received a special communication from heaven, induced another prophet—the one sent from Judah to denounce the judgment of heaven upon the altar erected by Jeroboam and the priests that served at it—to return and eat with him against an express injunction to the contrary.— (1 Kings 18) Such extraordinary behaviour on the part of that old prophet at Bethel, can scarcely be accounted for otherwise than on the supposition of a sort of convulsive effect having been produced upon his mind by the holy daring of the prophet from Judah, which contrasted so strongly with his own past unfaithfulness. For residing, as he did, at Bethel, the very scene of the new-enacted idolatry, it properly belonged to him to protest against the unrighteous innovation; for that he needed no direct revelation from heaven, as so many existing revelations bore upon the subject: he needed only a spirit of fearless and uncompromising allegiance to Jehovah; but not possessing this himself, and learning of a sudden, how nobly and with what approving signs from heaven it had been displayed by the prophet of Judah, he was seized with such a passionate desire of being honoured with the fellowship of that more faithful and distinguished brother, that he was resolved at all hazards to compass his return to Bethel. At the same time, cases of delinquency, such as those referred to, must certainly be regarded as belonging to an inferior kind of prophetical unfaithfulness as compared with the direct disobedience of Jonah. In the former, there was no special commission violated; the prophet merely failed to exercise the authority with which he was invested to lift up the testimony against sin, which God’s word had already delivered and put into his hands. The case certainly was different, and the transgression considerably more aggravated, when there was an immediate revelation from heaven, pointing out a particular field for the exercise of the prophetic agency, and a definite message given to be delivered there, and yet no attempt made to execute the solemn charge. Such, however, was Jonah’s case. Disobedient to the heavenly vision, “he rose up to flee from the presence of the Lord,” and went down to Joppa to take ship in a vessel hound for Tarshish (a city either on the coast of Spain, or the opposite coast of Africa, hence lying in a nearly contrary direction to Nineveh), “to go with them to Tarshish from the presence of the Lord.”

We are doubtless not to imagine Jonah so utterly foolish and ignorant in this effort to escape from an incumbent duty, as to suppose, that by flying to Tarshish he thought he might entirely evade the notice or oversight of God. We have only to suppose, that he was extremely reluctant to undertake the work imposed on him, and that he conceived it might possibly be allowed to fall into abeyance, if he could effect his removal to a distance from the region where the prophetic agency of God’s Spirit displayed itself. “He imagined,” to use the words of the Jewish commentator, Kimchi, “that if he went out of the land of Israel, the Spirit of prophecy would not rest upon him.” And making due allowance for the change that has taken place in outward circumstances, and in the mode of the Spirit’s working, the behaviour of Jonah does not seem to have differed materially from the conduct of those in Christian times who are divinely prompted from within, or in the course of providence are distinctly called to the performance of some important work of reformation, but morbidly shrink from the scene of labour, on account of the real or fancied difficulties which appear to surround it, and determinately cling to a place of comparative seclusion or retirement. (In such cases, there usually (though we can scarcely say always) is some degree of uncertainty whether there actually be a call of God, or at least there is some room left for the individual himself to doubt whether there be such a call, as renders it impossible for him to decline without directly contravening the will of Heaven. It is perfectly possible, however, that Jonah himself may have found some such loophole in the manner or time of the communication made to him respecting Nineveh. But viewed simply in respect to the state of mind which gave rise to the desire or purpose of evasion, it does not appear that Jonah’s case very essentially differed from that of Moses, when, after being driven from all his objections, he still sought to be relieved from the task of conducting Israel out of Egypt, as a work from which he at least must be excused. That he did not actually flee, like Jonah, from the appointed scene of labour arose more from the overawing manifestation of divine displeasure, than from any principle of duty yet working in his mind. In modern times also, we might refer to the illustrious Calvin, who, when urged to settle at Geneva as one peculiarly qualified to carry forward and complete the work of reformation there, was only arrested and brought off from his purpose of retirement and study by the terrible address of Farel, which seized him, he says, like the dreadful hand of God: “If you thus make your own studies a pretext for not assisting us in this work of God, I denounce to you in the name of Almighty God, that his curse shall cleave to you, as you are seeking self rather than Christ.” In such momentous undertakings, the greatest spirits are at first apt to misgive; indeed often none so apt as they; for they see more clearly than others the mighty interests involved, and the giant effort needed to effect the desired result.)

What the considerations actually were which pressed so heavily upon the mind of Jonah, and led him to disobey so plain a command of God, we are left in great measure to conjecture. One reason he has himself alleged near the conclusion of the book, where it is introduced in connexion with the disappointment he experienced at the preservation of Nineveh:—“I pray thee, O Lord, was not this my saying, when I was yet in my country? Therefore I fled before unto Tarshish; for I knew that thou art a gracious God, and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and repentest thee of the evil.” It is not altogether clear how Jonah intended this saying to be understood as a motive for his flight toward Tarshish; but the construction put upon it by Jerome, though concurred in by several of the fathers, certainly goes in the wrong direction: “The prophet knew, through the inward suggestion of the Holy Spirit, that the repentance of the Gentiles would be the ruin of the Jews. Therefore, as a lover of his country, he was not so much displeased at the thought of Nineveh’s salvation, as he was averse to the destruction of his own people;” as if the conversion of the Gentiles of necessity inferred the rejection of Israel, and were not rather to be regarded by a heaven-taught man as an important and distinguishing element in their coming glory. (Gen_12:3; Gen_22:18; Gen_49:10; Deu_32:43; Psalms 45, 67, 68, &c. The main stream of prophecy up till the time of Jonah in relation to the Gentiles, represented their dependence upon Israel for blessing, and pointed to the period of their actually coming to participate with Israel in their good. It is somewhat strange, and was no doubt partly owing to the loose typological views current in his age, that Lightfoot should have overlooked this prevailing current of prophecy up to the time of Jonah, and should hare so readily acquiesced in the superficial opinion of Jerome. In his Chronica Temporum, he accounts, first, for the position of the hook of Jonah after those of Hosea, Joel, Amos, and Obadiah, on the ground that these had respect to the destruction and desolation of Israel and Judah, together with Esau, while Jonah’s has respect to the calling of the Gentiles; and, secondly, for Jonah’s unwillingness to go to Nineveh, on the score of love to his own people, precisely as Jerome.) Far different thoughts were likely to crowd upon the mind of Jonah, when the formidable task was imposed upon him of going to do the work of a reformer in the vast metropolis of Assyria, and such as were more fitted to call forth the pity and forbearance of Heaven in respect to the wayward and erring course to which they impelled him. “Alas!” we can suppose him to have said within himself, “what can I hope to accomplish as the hearer of God’s message against the crying sins and abominations of Nineveh? I, a solitary individual, a poor and unknown stranger, in the midst of a proud, overgrown city, revelling in wealth and wantonness! What success have I had at home even among the people of my own tongue and nation? Here, with every advantage on my side, I have borne the testimony of God in vain, and have seen the hand of the Lord stretched out to save from impending ruin, with no other effect among the people at large than of giving new wings to profligacy and corruption. My soul is already sick with looking at the things which have been proceeding around me; my hands hang down nerveless and enfeebled, because of the fruitlessness of their past exertions; and yet I am the man to be sent to deal with that mighty mass of pride and unrestrained wickedness! Is there the least likelihood of their listening to my voice? Will they not rather taunt me, if I should for a moment gain their ear, with the continued impenitence of my own people, and my unavailing efforts to reclaim them? And, whatever success might attend my labours when transferred to that distant field, will not He who has so long spared Israel under so many provocations, much more spare them? Why may not matters, then, be allowed to take their course? Or, if the call to repentance must be proclaimed, let it be at least committed to one better prepared for the toils and difficulties of the undertaking.”

Such, we can readily suppose, might be the train of reflection that would press upon the mind of Jonah in the peculiarly trying circumstances in which he was now placed. It is true, neither the difficulties before nor the discouragements behind, which thus hung like a heavy and chilling cloud upon his soul, were sufficient to justify his refusal to deliver the Lord’s message in Nineveh; faith should have made him deaf to every remonstrant feeling, and should have carried him in triumph over the fears and misgivings which so naturally assailed him. But the situation in which he was placed was one of singular, almost unprecedented difficulty—commissioned, as he was, to a work which required the most dauntless courage and buoyant energy of spirit, while he was inwardly crushed with vexation at the incurable blindness and obstinacy of his own people. A sinking of the soul in such circumstances, and even a shrinking back for the moment from the appointed task, however deserving of rebuke in the eye of God, is never to be placed on a level with backslidings and transgressions of an ordinary kind. And to apply here, as is so frequently done, to the son of Amittai the narrow measuring-line of common rules and “modern instances,” and then to deal out against him such railing accusation as might suit only the most perverse and inexcusable offenders, is simply to betray one’s ignorance of the affecting peculiarities of his case, or one’s inability to sympathize with the troubles of a soul reeling and staggering under its weighty load of sore discouragements and overwhelming obligations.

With such a view of Jonah’s situation, we see no occasion to wonder, with certain moralizers on his history, that, notwithstanding his present failing, he should still be reckoned among the true prophets and eminent servants of God; far less are we disposed to concur with certain others, who seem almost to grudge him a place at all in the number of the saints. But, on the other hand, we are as far from being disposed to deny that his conduct merited the rod of chastisement; nor was he long in finding it applied with righteous severity, though the judgment, as might have been expected in the circumstances, was graciously tempered with mercy. Indeed, it was an act of mercy to employ any means to check him in his course; for the worst thing that can be done to a transgressor, is to let him alone in his transgression. The adversary of souls could wish for nothing more favourable to his designs; and, though he is himself incapable of doing or desiring any thing in itself good, we can yet suppose him looking on with malignant satisfaction, when the child of disobedience is seen swimming in prosperity, as if borne on the propitious gales of heaven, while still drifting with fatal certainty on the rocks of perdition.

Such delusive prosperity, however, can never be more than temporary. The truth cannot be long in making itself known, that “the righteous Lord loveth righteousness,” and that “the way of transgressors is hard”—the more hard if, by the greatness of their privileges, or the dignity of their calling, they have come to occupy a relation of peculiar nearness to God. For the closer their connexion with him, the more quick and immediate must always be the flashes of divine resentment upon them, when they presume to resist the claims of the divine authority. Least of all was it possible for such a person as Jonah to be allowed to prosper in his waywardness; a prophet raised up to be a guide to others, and yet himself taking the path of transgression! He of all men must be checked in his career. And so “the Lord sent out a great wind into the sea, and there was a mighty tempest in the sea, so that the ship was like to be broken.”

That one, who knew so well the all-pervading presence and controlling providence of God, should have imagined he could be safe in committing himself to the waves of ocean, when flying as a rebel from the appointment of Him who made that “swelling deep,” as well as “the dry land,” is an astonishing proof of the blinding influence of sin. In the very simplest elements of his faith, there was enough to condemn Jonah of flagrant misconduct. But we may not, on that account, wantonly aggravate the greatness of his guilt. ‘We have no ground to affirm, and it is against all probability to suppose, that his conscience was already lulled into a profound sleep, and that it plied him with no upbraidings of remorse. We are not warranted to regard the deep slumber in which he lay when the storm rose upon the ship, as the symptom of a benumbed and stupified heart, but should rather ascribe it, in so far as any moral cause may have contributed to its production, to the depressed and dislocated state of his mind, arising from the painful struggle with convictions of duty through which he had passed. The whole we can with confidence say of this part of his history is, that the divine retribution was swifter than his own apprehensions of danger; and that he was actually surrounded with the deep waters before he was conscious of their approach. But he was soon to be aroused as with a voice of thunder; for when all efforts failed to contend against the storm, or to secure the vessel from destruction—when the angry elements, waxing continually more violent and threatening, forced on the minds of all, doubtless through the directing agency of the Spirit, a conviction of some one being in the vessel whom the vengeance of heaven was pursuing with evil (How near such a thought was to the ancient heathen appears from the words of Horace, Car. iii. 2, v. 26:—

—Vetaho, qui Cereris sacrum

Vulgarit arcanie, sub isdem

Sit trabibus, fragilemque mecum

Solvat phaselon. Saepe Diespiter, &c.)—and when the trial by lot was resorted to for the purpose of ascertaining who the guilty individual might be, and the lot fell upon Jonah—then he felt the arrest of God’s hand upon him. “Thou art the man,” resounded in his inmost soul; and in the tempest, that raged with so much fury, he at once recognized and owned the instrument of vengeance to punish his iniquity.